IL2 Normandy

[pembquist]

I've only flown the IL2COD team fusion mod which is called something else now. I didn't have the patience or maybe it is different in that version but the view system didn't work for me and somebody gave me track IR. Never liked using the track IR in AH but in the IL2 it made it much better. I think right out of the box the AH view system is really easy to set up and use unlike any other flight sim I have tried.

[bozon]

Thanks for the info guys. It is good to hear that the IL2 view system has improved since I tried it some 10 years ago. Seems like Normandy will be worth checking out when it is released. I watched some YT vids of the “flying circus” title and WWI could also be a cool different thing to try.

Bruv, DCS P-47D module is definitely on my list to consider for getting into DCS world. However for DCS VR/trackir is a must. I tried the community A4 Skyhawk and couldn’t play it without - keyboard or POV hat were way too clumsy.

[fd ski]

i tried that recently and can't get into it too much.

Seems that flying with VR i'm at double disadvantage to anyone with TrackIR.

1. Check 6 - to do so in VR means turning your head around almost 180 degrees. I know it is realistic, however everyone with Track IR turns only about 45 degrees to get the same effect ( scaling ). AH solves this problem nicely giving ability to use hat-switch to go to 6 view and then VR works from that point on, however neither DCS nor IL2 allows this. For me, playing in VR this is a dealbreaker.

2. Zooms - for some reason in VR zooms are much shorter then in TrackIR. While in TrackIR people zoom out so far that they can spot bogeys 10 miles out ( DCS, Ralfi's videos ) - in VR you get only a short zoom - you can barely make out the difference between Mig 29 and F18 at couple of miles. Forget the spoting at long ranges. You're virtually blind compared to guy with TrackIR. In my recent adventure with IL2 - similar thing occured - i could not make out countries of planes ( no icon dogfight server ) at all but shortest ranges

I'd love to spend more time in DCS/IL2 but i feel i would been to go back to TrackIR to be anything other then cannon fodder. And I'm not going back, ever.

[bozon]

Digging into DCS forums I discovered that Mossie FB.VI is not on hold and is scheduled to release in the next decade, but rumors say Q3 2020! And... it is being made by eagle dynamics, so it is going to get the full treatment 
My underwear are soiled again. 

P-47D is rumored to be released Q1 2020, also by ED.
My poor Mirage III is on hold by 3rd party developer RAZBAM because they prioritized some insignificant other AC. WHERE IS MY BLOODY MIRAGE RAZBAM?!!!   

[hazmatt]

Hey Bruv119. In this video are those planes you are fighting drones or other players? Curious because it doesn't seem that they are using the k4's climb rate as well as they could have.

Thanks I'll probably grab all three like Trips at that price.

[Bruv119]

Hey Bruv119. In this video are those planes you are fighting drones or other players? Curious because it doesn't seem that they are using the k4's climb rate as well as they could have.

It was a human player.  Against really good K4 pilots they would normally eat you alive in a P51 however I've had some successes when using some energy retaining turning circles (perverts 190D eagle claw maneuver)  and if they pull too hard vertically they can struggle with the immense torque the k4 puts out in the stall.  If I was in the Spit I'd have been around on him in a flash but then they will just extend and rightly so.  He may have also been a bit concerned with his engine overheating as we fought for longer than usual at lower speeds.   I had my rad and oil flaps full open and was very borderline on my temps too.  The beauty of it is everything on the instrument panel is clickable/mappable and you need to use all of those instruments and gauges which ups the realism aspect for me. 

As for the mirage bozon, they are doing a falklands map and will most likely pair it off against the sea harrier.     Their release dates and what to do next thought process is all over the place.  Dropping the I16 and 190A8 out of nowhere made no sense but the more WW2 stuff the better IMO.  The updated Normandy map is also much better than initial release.

[bozon]

Thanks Bruv 
Indeed it looks like the are pushing WWII harder now. Most of the jet projects have been handed over to 3rd party devs, and ED are releasing the WWII stuff.

I’ll wait for the P47 to enter DCS WWII and use the time till then to get familiarized and set up using the free modules (and ask for trackir as my birthday present:)). Noobdom here I come! I imagine the Jug and Mossie will turn out to be total dogs in that game, but who knows, maybe they will be good? The important thing is to go down in style.

... worst case I’ll settle for half a mosquito and fly Spit XI.

[Nefarious]

Had a lot of fun in IL2 combat box server last night. Look for me if you're playing there.

[Bruv119]

Thanks Bruv 
Indeed it looks like the are pushing WWII harder now. Most of the jet projects have been handed over to 3rd party devs, and ED are releasing the WWII stuff.

I’ll wait for the P47 to enter DCS WWII and use the time till then to get familiarized and set up using the free modules (and ask for trackir as my birthday present:)). Noobdom here I come! I imagine the Jug and Mossie will turn out to be total dogs in that game, but who knows, maybe they will be good? The important thing is to go down in style.

... worst case I’ll settle for half a mosquito and fly Spit XI.

Just flying and returning these birds in this environment was reward enough for the manual studying (chuck's) and the youtube vids.  Fighting with them is just secondary, still alot of fun and using some mossie cannon on them will be extremely satisfying 

The even cooler thing with the P47D and Mossie will be that no-one else knows how to fly them either  so working out whether to push or pull a lever or flick that switch on/off will all be part of it.   Like an actual test pilot.  As for the dogs statement we will see but the flight model is excellent so they will have a fair shout.   The mossies stall recovery will be very interesting as it will be their first twin engined plane.

[mora]

If HT made a new sim from ground up it would be miles ahead. The IL-2 FM is bad. It's the WW1 ROF FM from 2009. It's a complete patchwork, for example the flaps are completely unrealistic turning AC into kites, probably because they are an afterthought. Here's an interesting video: https://youtu.be/NDCkexCZrpA

[Eagler]

VR is much better in AH3 than IL2 IMO

<S>

Eagler

[pembquist]

Just tried the Battle of Stalingrad Etc. and it is interesting because it is different from AH. Frankly I think AH is a much better deal. I don't understand the economics of the servers and it isn't like there are more people playing on them, or can play on them, than AH. Sure you can think "I got this game for 12 bucks on sale" but realistically if you want ALL the aircraft you have to spend away. I do like the maps and the need for pilotage on some of the servers, the absence of icons, the painterly maps made out of real geography;on the other hand, the time to get into action is pretty tedious after a bit. I don't mean the flight to the battle I mean the delay in loading and having to go through the whole slow engine start and taxi thing. It seems to take forever. Compared to IL2 COD the snap views seem better but they aren't as changeable as AH, there is not FOV setting that you can easily change for instance. I found that I had difficulty following cons between some of the view snaps. I don't care for the excessive movement of the pilots head, it doesn't feel real to me, it feels like rubber bands are between me and the simulation.

[Brooke]

IF they try and pull all that no icon baloney, then I wouldn't be interested.

I hate no icon as well.  It is not hard to keep track of a real airplane in a real dogfight (my opinion based on when I flew Air Combat USA), but in Bruv's video of his fight, I lost track of the enemy when the field of view swept past some ground features with darker background.

Squinting at the screen or losing sight of a guy you are focused on who is only 300 yards away isn't for me.

I hated how they handled views and icons in the old WWIIOL as well.

[CptTrips]

I hate no icon as well.  It is not hard to keep track of a real airplane in a real dogfight (my opinion based on when I flew Air Combat USA), but in Bruv's video of his fight, I lost track of the enemy when the field of view swept past some ground features with darker background.

Squinting at the screen or losing sight of a guy you are focused on who is only 300 yards away isn't for me.

I hated how they handled views and icons in the old WWIIOL as well.

I'll be fine with no icon when display technology has caught up with the resolution, contrast, and dynamic range of real world human visual acuity.  Especially that of a 20 year old perfect physical specimen military pilot.

Until then, no icon is less realistic than icon, ironically.

[Brooke]

It just was no problem at all -- not in the slightest -- tracking a real plane during a real flight at prop-plane distances (not talking about jets here).  A flight sim with icons is more realistic than one without.  Without icons, games make something effortlessly infallible in reality into something that is an error-prone PITA in the game.

In flight sims, you have different sensory modalities compared to real life.  A good sim should make a thing similarly easy or similarly hard compared to real life, not to mimic it in a way that makes something that is easy in real life annoyingly harder in the game or vice versa.